This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

Sparaco Sputters - Then Stalls

Legislator Sparaco says he has 8 hours of tapes proving corruption in Clarkstown. However, having been sued for defamation and become the subject of an ethics investigation he is reluctant to provide the unedited tapes he claims proves his case.


"It is axiomatic in government that hornets' nests should be left unstirred, cans of worms should remain unopened, and cats should be left firmly in bags and not set among the pigeons. Politicians should also leave boats unrocked, sleeping dogs to lie, refrain from taking bulls by the horns, and resolutely turn their faces away from the music." - 'Yes Minister', a satirical British sitcom from BBC Television running from 1980 to 1988. 

According to Cliff Weathers of NYaltNews.com, Rockland County Legislator Frank Sparaco held a press event on July 15, 2013 to showcase some heavily-edited, secretly-recorded audio and video of him trying to lure local politicians into making petty bribes in return of support for a Democratic candidate. The only thing missing was the presentation of the fake mustache and magnifying glass used in the investigation. (The fake mustache and magnifying glass being a reference made by Weathers to the character Inspector Clouseau portrayed by Peter Sellers in the Pink Panther movie series.)

Weathers continued: Sparaco claims he provided all of the audio to the FBI but the FBI did not have their own press conference, nor did they seem to care that Sparaco was producing what would be prosecutorial evidence in a possible corruption scandal. In fact, after allegedly questioning Sparaco for three hours, the bureau hasn’t called him back

So are the tapes a waste of plastic?

Sparaco claims he covertly recorded some eight hours of audio with Rockland County Democratic Party attorney Larry Weissman, Republican Clarkstown Councilman Frank Borelli, and Democrat Dennis Malone. Sparaco also claims that other politicians were aware and involved in the plot.

Who the "other politicians" are that were involved in the plot remains to be revealed. Malone has stated that several approaches were made for him to come to a meeting to be attended by both Sparaco and Jay Savino prior to Savino's arrest by the FBI and dismissal from his $87,000 patronage job in the Town of Clarkstown. Malone refused to attend but one must wonder if he was the only invitee to these Sparaco/Savino soirées? 

As to the credibility of the whole taping operation, Weathers asks that we "read between the lines": 

We’re talking about a serial grandstander already dripping with machine politics. Sparaco’s got virtual control of two, if not three, political parties in the County and has a cushy part-time desk job with the town (in addition to his other well-paid job as a County Legislator). His mother-in-law, Debra Ortutay (then chair of the Rockland Independence Party), 
pled guilty of perjury and fraud charges and went to prison for forging signatures on party petitions during the 2010 election. Also that year, The Journal News found that multiple donations to Sparaco’s failed State Assembly campaign came from sources reputed to be within the Colombo crime family. As Sparaco does not give the appearance of a political Boy Scout .... this seems to be nothing more than hysterics by a overindulged brat who was egged on by a clownish, demented “uncle".Art Aldrich writing in the December 25, 2013 issue of Our Town added further ridicule to Sparaco's escapade saying:  

Frank Sparaco, loudly proclaiming his civic virtue, launched a do-it-yourself undercover video sting that made a number of politicos look gullible and just plain stupid. Unfortunately, the Rockland County District Attorney was bypassed and the FBI wanted no part of Sparaco's amateur sleuthing. Waiting for some productive outcome from Inspector Clouseau and his all-too candid camera is much like waiting for Godot

Grabbing this bull by the horns Malone sued Sparaco and three others (Rockland County GOP Chairman, Vinny Reda; Clarkstown GOP Chairman, Bob Axelrod; and Clarkstown Highways Superintendent, Wayne Ballard) and, through his attorney, asked to be provided with an unedited copy of the eight hours of tapes that Sparaco claims supported his allegations of bribery and corruption.  Sparaco's reaction was not to say "Here are the unedited tapes!"  Instead he launched into a tirade on Facebook with his friend and putative Head of the Independence Party, John Perrotta, calling Borelli and Malone "liars, extortionists and bribery artists".

This is the exchange copied from Legislator Sparaco's Facebook page .....

Sparaco:
  Mr. Borelli and Mr. Malone are liars, extortionists and bribery artists. They are trying to cheat there (sic) way into office. They have threatened to sue me for slander.  My response is the tapes speak for themselves, I have truth on my side. I dare you to sue me. I can't wait to dispose (sic) you and see you lie under oath. Put your money where your mouth is punks!

John Perrotta 
III:  Oh this is going to be fun. We love playing with little punks.
Sparaco sought unsuccessfully to have Malone's lawsuit dismissed. When that request was not granted he appealed to a higher court. Instead of providing the eight hours of material to Malone, Sparaco appears not to be "putting his own money where his mouth is". The material produced to date has been so severely edited that the editor of the Our Town newspaper, Art Aldrich, completely rejected what had been provided saying:

The tapes were edited!  I couldn't accept that as a journalist. When I wrote the story (in Our Town) I pointed out some of the inconsistencies and I couldn't accept that as a contemporaneous record made by an impartial party. Everybody had an axe to grind in this including Mr. Sparaco. 

Mr. Aldrich was referring to the timestamp that accompanies any digital recording which revealed that even in the sections of the recordings Sparaco presented to the press small segments had even been removed in these raising questions as to why. 

On September 11, 2013, Robin Traum of New City Patch described Clarkstown Town Board resolution that had been passed unanimously and which required Sparaco to hand over the eight hours of unedited videotapes to the Town Attorney to support an ethics investigation of his 'candid camera' saga. 

Traum wrote: Clarkstown Councilman Frank Borelli asked for an ethics committee investigation of Sparaco’s secretly recorded tapes. Excerpts of the taped conversations, which Sparaco had with Borelli, Malone and Weissman, were disclosed in mid July. Borelli’s motion, which was passed (unanimously) by the town board, asked for an investigation of Sparaco, Malone, Ballard and (Borelli) himself. Borelli said it was incumbent on the board to make sure all actions and activities of town employees and town officials conformed to Clarkstown’s Code of Ethics. 

Borelli stated in his motion: “In addition the town board should request that Mr. Sparaco provide a copy of all unedited video and audio tapes he recorded with an unbroken timeline to the town attorney to hold until such time as the videotapes are requested by the Board of Ethics for its review,” 

Councilwoman Stephanie Hausner then spoke about her support for the resolution.

“The reason I seconded Councilman Borelli’s motion was I do really feel like we need to take these allegations seriously. We need to take this videotape seriously. We need to let the Board of Ethics look into the events that have occurred over the summer.”

Traum went on to report on New City resident Tom Nimick's request that the town board relieve Deputy Town Attorney Jeffrey Millman of his Board of Ethics duties because of a possible conflict of interest

“This past week Mr. Millman, a deputy town attorney, was in court representing a partisan position concerning ballot petitions. How is such activity consistent with his employment as a full-time deputy town attorney, who should be ‘seen to be acting solely in the public interest’?” asked Nimick. 

Nimick suggested the Town Board hire independent counsel to advise the Board of Ethics.  But the Town Board members chose to ignore Nimick's advice and continue to turn their faces away from the perceived 'conflict of interest' that exists with Millman's present role in handling this ethics investigation.  

All of this brings us to a December 25, 2013 article entitled 'Sparaco Told Not To Torn Over Tapes' in which Anne Phyllis Pinzow reported that Frank Sparaco informed the Our Town newspaper he was told not to turn over the tapes (presumably by the attorney for the Ethics Board, Jeffrey Millman). 

Pinzow wrote: Allegations were again brought up at a Clarkstown Town Board meeting on December 19, 2013 concerning Sparaco and audio and videotapes he made public this past June to document his self-styled sting operationAllegedly the tapes are of attempts to bribe Sparaco to “betray” Wayne Ballard. The bribes were purportedly offered by Frank Borelli, Dennis Malone as well as Larry Weissman.

At the town board meeting Michael Hull asked if the tapes had been turned over to Town Attorney Amy Mele as per a resolution passed several months ago ordering Sparaco to do so. Hull was told the tapes had not been received by Mele. Subsequently, resident Marge Hook told the Board that Sparaco would show the tapes to anyone who asked but was fearful they'd be altered or edited in some way by elements in Clarkstown government.
Hook, who has apparently unilaterally anointed herself as Sparaco's Chief Communications Representative, stated: 

"Frank Sparaco has offered to show the tapes to anyone that (sic) wants to see them. He will not turn them over because he is 
afraid of people 'fooling around' with them and 'editing' them to the 'best of their own knowledge'.  I am very happy with Frank Sparaco and Wayne Ballard and for those who don't like it - 'Get Over It'!
Apparently Pinzow did not accept the unsolicited advice to 'get over it' and decided to rock Sparaco's leaking boat a little more writing:  

Our Town contacted Sparaco in order to verify the statements made by Hook.
 In a telephone interview Sparaco said he received two emails from the Clarkstown Board of Ethics, both of which he forwarded upon request. The first dated September 17, 2013 stated:

“The Board of Ethics of the Town of Clarkstown has requested that you submit the unedited video tape and audio tape that is subject to the investigation. They are requesting that this information be delivered on or before Tuesday, December 10, 2013.”

A subsequent email from the Board of Ethics, sent less than 24 hours later, read:

“After speaking to Jeff Millman (the deputy Town Attorney) the Board of Ethics would like you to disregard this prior email. At this time it is NOT required to submit the audio and videotape. IF it is required in the future, the Board of Ethics will contact you.”
What part Mr. Millman played in the preparation of the first email is now a matter of speculation given that within 24 hours of sending the first email an enormous 'IF' suddenly appeared in the Ethics Board's thinking.

Someone
 spoke with Millman and the request to Sparaco was reversed!

Pinzow continued: Sparaco said the reason he was given for the second email was that he was in the middle of an ongoing criminal investigation as well as a libel lawsuit concerning the tapes and they (the members of the Board of Ethics) had no authority to ask for the tapes until the lawsuits were settled. Sparaco said: I stand by the truth ... here’s the bottom line, Mr. Borelli, Mr. Malone, Larry Weissman partook in a conspiracy in my opinion, offered me Nancy Willen’s job for significant pay raise and a house in Florida to betray Wayne Ballard, take their bribe and go work for him (Malone) if I would betray Wayne Ballard and help him (Malone) win the election. That is the bottom line. Nothing can change that fact.

Any hoi polloi watcher of 'Judge Judy' understands that a statement of 'truth' is frequently presented on that show with as many as six different levels of complexity:

a) What actually happened.
b) What the witness believed happened.
c) What the witness wants to believe happened.
d) What the witness would have liked to have happened.
e) What the witness wants other people to believe happened.
f) What the witness wants other people to believe he believed happened.

However, only the first of these pertains to the issue of 'truth' even in Judge Judy's TV courtroom - the other five are figments of a witness's imagination and are therefore simply matters of 'opinion'. The truth and nothing but the truth remains a key principle of jurisprudence. But what is understood as 'the truth' is 'the whole truth' which can only be achieved when unedited evidence is considered.

Earlier at the December Town Board meeting, Millman, in his role as the sole legal advisor to the Ethics Board, told the Town Board that he could tell them nothing about the status of the ongoing investigations because “Pursuant to the Code and Statute, all investigations before the Board of Ethics are confidential.”  

However, this statement does not appear to apply to Legislator Sparaco who operates with the appearance that the Ethics Board's restrictions on confidential communications can be bypassed if it is to his advantage. Therefore, he is free to let any cat he wants out of his bag to frolic amidst the pigeons.

Patch continued: (The Ethics Board members) have been meeting regularly in the past few months and he (Millman) has requested 20 dates of them for when they are available from January through March with a goal to conclude all investigations and advisory opinions in the first quarter of 2014.

It should be clear that what we are witnessing here is an ethics investigation being conducted by the Town of Clarkstown with a possibly compromised Town Attorney that is scheduled to be completed within three months without the central evidence at the core of the investigation having been provided to the members of the Ethics Board. What possibly may never be examined are the unedited and uncut recordings made by Sparaco that were used by him to declare that a Town Councilman and a Town employee were corrupt. 

As Mr. Sparaco might aptly put it "Nothing can change that fact". 

Is the fear expressed in Hook's verbal meanderings before the Town Board justified that there are people in the Town government who would "fool around" with evidence? Does "fooling around" with evidence involve not looking at the evidence at all? Perhaps Sparaco has a can of worms that neither he nor the Ethics Board really want to open? After all the members of the Ethics Board appear to have accepted a somewhat dubious yet fantastical claim that the tapes are part of an "ongoing criminal investigation" and therefore can not be provided for their review.

For those of us still living in the real world, Sparaco's "nothing can change the fact" aphorism holds true that the FBI, the District Attorney, the Clarkstown Police Department, and the Town attorney all appear to be making no effort to prevent him from providing the items in question to his employer, the Town of Clarkstown or to the Board of Ethics.

The Town of Clarkstown is surreptitiously morphing into the 'Town of Wonderlandwhere 'important' documents are deemed 'unimportant' in deciding questions of ethics. In this 'Town of Wonderland' board members pretend that a part-time salary of $75,000 being paid to a town employee is not under their control and unanimous resolutions of the Board can be ignored by a town employee even when those documents are required by another town employee and an elected official to clear their names from charges of corruption.

In this new 'Town of Wonderland' we must turn to 'Alice's Adventures in Wonderland' to figure out who is now in charge of the Town's 'mad-hatter' tea parties ......

'That's very IMPORTANT,' the King said, turning to the jury.  

The jury were just beginning to write 'important' down on their slates, when the White Rabbit interrupted: 'UNIMPORTANT, your Majesty means, of course,' the White Rabbit said in a very respectful tone, but frowning and making faces at the King as he spoke. 

'UNIMPORTANT, of course, I meant,' the King hastily said, and went on to repeat to himself in an undertone, 'important - unimportant - unimportant - important' as if he were trying which word sounded best. 

Some of the jury wrote down 'important,' and some 'unimportant.' Alice could see this, as she was near enough to look over their slates; 'but it doesn't matter a bit,' she thought to herself. 

Find out what's happening in New Citywith free, real-time updates from Patch.

The King then said in an offended tone: 'Let the jury consider their verdict'.  

'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first - verdict afterwards.' 

Find out what's happening in New Citywith free, real-time updates from Patch.

'Nonsense!' said Alice loudly. 'The idea of having the sentence first ...!'  

'Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple. 

'I won't!' said Alice. 

'Off with her head'! the Queen shouted at the top of her voice 

Since it is obvious that neither the 'King', the 'Queen' nor the 'White Rabbit' are in control of what goes on in the Town of Wonderland we might look to Alice for her advice. She would probably suggest that if the King, Queen, or the White Rabbit happen across a pink panther prowling the Town of Wonderland's parks and highways they might infer that Inspector Clouseau is running this show all by himself!

Inspector ClouseauI have waited a long time to prove myself, and now I have been given the opportunity of a lifetime. I intend to show the world exactly who I am and what I can do - The Pink Panther (2006)


This blog is authored by Michael N. Hulla retired senior citizen. Hull contributes periodically to the Facebook page Clarkstown: What They Don't Want You To Know.  
We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?